Given MS history, EEE was the first thing I thought about too. Take something, extend, then claim it's superior and everyone should stop using the original.
But if it simply means they are making a new language using lessons from Rust - then why not.
Though I didn't quite get what problem they found with using the idea of scope based lifetimes per object, that they needed to redefine it in context of groups.
But if it simply means they are making a new language using lessons from Rust - then why not.
Though I didn't quite get what problem they found with using the idea of scope based lifetimes per object, that they needed to redefine it in context of groups.